Srsly ? You link to the extremely dubious section on WWII that only postulates oral evidence — and that from Alexander Werth an’ Ilya Ehrenburg, two particular men who if they told you it was raining outside in August in Patagonia would induce you to fear drought — and ignore the WWI section at the very beginning where the shamefaced British Government apologises for telling lies about ‘cadaver rendering’…
In other words, killing millions, engaging in racial cleansing, etc. was to be damned, but who would ever want to make soap from the corpses? What do you think we are, crazed killers? Can’t say that without including Stalin, and all the other mass killers.
To clarify the point: bullshit WWI propaganda made it easier to dismiss WWII atrocities as just more propaganda.
In WWI a rumor went out that the Germans had crucified a Canadian soldier. Rather than squelch it, the British ran with it. Canadians developed a bad reputation for killing prisoners. In the next war, the Waffen SS summarily shot Canadian POWs
Given his first name, I immediately thought about the Star Trek episode, “The Omega Glory”. No connection to this thread, other there must be some kind of moral tied in somewhere. 
Are you sure you’re not misremembering this? I’ve never heard of the Canadians having a bad reputation for killing prisoners in WW2, nor of the SS as a whole summarily executing Canadian POWs. What did happen was that at Normandy the 12th SS Panzer Division Hitlerjugend murdered 156 Canadian and 2 British POWs on June 7th. After discovering the bodies of the victims the Canadians in retaliation more or less stopped taking prisoners from the 12th SS, which they remained in contact with for the rest of the Normandy campaign.
Moderator Note
Claverhouse, this is General Questions. Let’s spare us the side political commentary, and stick to factual responses.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Which is the same thing that happened to French, British, Russian, Belgian, Canadian, Italian, and American troops (albeit with different amounts of distances spent in transit). WWI was a brutal war but it didn’t single out the Chinese for any special brutality.
Maybe we should be using different colored fonts for WWI and WWII in this thread.
(Cite for Canadians in WWI not taking prisoners: Goodbye to All That)
Cite for accounts of brutality towards Indochinese laborers: every biography of Ho Chi Mihn tells of the French forcibly taking gangs of men away, most of whom never returned. Otto Freidrick of Time Magazine wrote that identification numbers were painted on Indochinese conscript laborer’s backs in acid.
And those were troops, either volunteered or conscripted; the Chinese labourers sent to dig those front-line trenches, quite near to the German artillery, were neither armed nor soldiers.
Actually, after the ending of black slavery in the West, some imperial powers made a habit of compelling large groups of poor others to work as indentured servants all over the colonies, including Chinese from the south. This use in South Africa brought down a British government in 1905, plus of course the forcible use of American rail-road builders earlier — many of whom were ill-treated by the then American population at large. It certainly wasn’t slavery, but the effects were often identical.
The gangs used in France were of this nature. And quite sullen most of the time.
Of course, the German trenches were famously much better, anyway. Buying your trenches from Walmart doesn’t pay in the long term.
Hah, I get what you were saying now.
These questions that keep getting moved to this forum along with the OP’s newly locked thread in ATMB are starting to sound like homework questions.
Considering the range of subjects the OP has asked about, if that’s so he must be taking a quite incredible course load including a history class that extends from Neanderthals to at least WWI.